Not yet registered?Sign upLogin

Excise Tariff Validation Bill 2009 - Customs Tariff Validation Bill 2009

Speeches May 13 2009

» Download speech

Almost two months ago I stood in this spot and urged the Rudd government to reconsider its position on whether or not to keep the money raised by the collection of the Alcopops tax in the past 12 months.

The coalition, the Greens, Independent Nick Xenophon and I were all in agreement that the tax collected should be retained by the government. But the government said no to keeping the tax collected.

It did this because it was more interested in trying to make a political point. It stubbornly refused to do the sensible thing and to keep the millions of dollars that had been collected through the ready-to-drink tax over the past year.

In fact, the Rudd government insisted the collected money from the tax be handed back to the alcohol industry.

Senator Cormann — That’s right.

Senator FIELDING — That is right. That is absolutely the way the government voted. I was disappointed with the government’s lack of maturity and its determination to point score on this matter. But it appears the government has come to its senses.

Today we see a government that has recognised that its stubborn stance of two months ago bordered on the absolutely ridiculous. But much of the debate about the so-called alcopops tax was farcical.
Initially, we were told with great sincerity by the Rudd government that it was not a tax measure but an important strategy to tackle the binge-drinking epidemic—an epidemic that is creating a climate of fear in Australia and destroying families and relationships.

But the Rudd government finally came clean. After the tax grab failed to pass the Senate in March, the government began talking about the importance of the measure as a tax, not a binge-drinking strategy.

Fair enough: it is a tax measure on one product but it is not a binge-drinking strategy.

It never has been and will not be.

The government hijacked the debate on binge drinking and then had the gall to pretend it was not.

What a pity the Rudd government was not honest from the outset. What a pity the Rudd government did not come before this place and say, ‘We want to introduce a tax on this product,’ and at the same time allow an honest and open debate about the problem of binge-drinking in our community and the best way to tackle it.

The government has missed an enormous opportunity to have a real debate about what is a real crisis in our country.

It is a crisis of culture, because Australia has a drinking problem. Australia has a drinking-to-get-drunk culture, and no tax will fix that.

We must change the way Australians feel about alcohol and how they act around it.

We must tackle the core of this terrible mindset, where the only way to enjoy yourself is to get blind drunk and where you are not a real man if you do not get blind drunk.

Recent research found that 80 per cent of Australians think that we do have a drinking problem, and 85 per cent want more to be done about it. This research comes a year after the alcopops tax was introduced, a year in which alcohol fuelled violence, domestic violence, hospital admissions and car accidents continued unabated.

Australians are calling out for change. Australians are calling out for leadership. How does this government respond to that call? With a tax grab on one product.

When the swine flu epidemic was considered a reality for Australia, the Rudd government acted immediately, but what does the Rudd government do when it is faced with alcohol abuse, binge drinking and violence that continue to scar our friends, families and colleagues? The Rudd government responds to Australia’s alcohol toll with a blatant tax grab on one product and hides behind it as a solution.

What a farce; Australians know it is a farce.

This government is not content with hijacking a decent debate about Australia’s alcohol toll—it costs Australia $15.3 billion each year to mop up after excessive alcohol consumption—and hiding behind the blatant tax grab called the alcopops tax; it also wants to use this issue for a double dissolution.

Senator O’Brien —No, you want us to.

Senator FIELDING —Now they want to use it for a double dissolution. I take the interjection from the government. They reckon that I want to use it. That is just a joke. You guys could bring in tomorrow the tax that you are proposing for this measure to continue rather than waiting.

When are you going to wait until? June? Why June? Does waiting until June give you the trigger for a double dissolution? Does it? I bet you the answer is yes.

You would not bring it in tomorrow, would you? You would not try to test the parliament tomorrow, would you? You would wait until June to deliberately make it a double dissolution trigger. You guys are not honest. You guys have got to be real. Bring it in tomorrow; do not wait until June. Let us have the debate and then let us get on to the real issue: tackling binge drinking.

Back in 2007, Family First also spoke to the then Leader of the Opposition, now Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, about this and raised three issues.

The first issue was warning labels on alcohol products, which does not cost the government a cent. But they will not do that; it does not collect any revenue, so they will not do that one.

The second issue was getting the ads out of the control of the industry and into an independent body. They will not do that either.

The third issue was the big one: restrictions on advertising alcohol, closing that crazy loophole that allows alcohol ads to appear at any time of day because of sports programming. That is linking alcohol with sports.

We have a huge issue with alcohol in sport, yet they refused to implement that measure. Again, it cost them nothing. But no, they are quite happy to hide behind a blatant tax grab and try to con Australia. Well, Australians have woken up to it. They are against it, and they know that you folks are hijacking a decent debate on how to tackle binge drinking.

Hijacking the debate and turning binge drinking into a tax problem does no good to anyone. It is not leadership. It does all of Australia a disservice, and the sooner we get beyond this issue the better.

I challenge the government to bring in tomorrow the legislation to keep the tax going forward rather than using this issue for political point scoring or as a trigger for a double dissolution. You guys are not real. You have to stop hiding behind this tax and start addressing the real issues.

A drug educator with Drug and Alcohol Research and Training Australia, Paul Dillon, was right when he said in an article in the Newcastle Herald:
Alcohol and sport are tangled together so tightly in this country that it is extremely difficult to work out where one stops and the other one begins and that is exactly the way the alcohol companies like it. As a result, there are very few sports now that don’t have a drinking culture.

You have a chance to break that link. Give us a date when you will bring in advertising restrictions that break the link between alcohol and sport. Make the announcement today.

But no, you would rather use the issue for political point scoring and a double dissolution. Why? Because you are scared? Why not bring it in tomorrow rather than in June? You will not answer that question, will you? Mr Dillon goes on to say in his article:
It is time for this link to be severed—not because alcohol is bad or we should not be drinking but because it sends a mixed and confusing message to the Australian public.

The government has agreed to introduce alcohol warning labels and they agreed to make sure that the ads are not in the control of the advertising industry—but only if the tax stays.

Come clean with the Australian public and explain why you will not implement those two measures anyway. Why are you trying to hold onto the tax? It is not working.

You are actually hijacking the debate so that we cannot have a decent debate on what measures Australia should put in place to change the culture of alcohol.

Turning binge drinking into a tax problem is mischievous. It is hijacking the debate and stopping Australia from moving on to a mature debate about what measures need to be put in place to create a culture of responsible drinking.

The issue that this government has not come clean on in coming to parliament is why they will not break the link between alcohol and sport by putting in place tough alcohol advertising restrictions that dehook alcohol from sport.

How many more days, how many more months will it take? How many more cases of alcohol having a huge, devastating impact on sport and leading many of our young Australians astray do we have to read about on the front page of the paper? How much longer can you allow this to happen before you come into this place and say that, by this date, you will put restrictions on alcohol advertising in sport? You have to be real.

Let us hope the money that has been collected does not just go into the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet to give them a few extra staff; let us hope the money is used to address binge drinking rather than just filling your coffers.

Let us make sure that we actually get the money used wisely—all of it, not just part of it.

Let us make sure this government stops hiding behind a blatant tax grab and gets onto the real issue of addressing binge drinking by putting in measures that will really tackle Australia’s drinking problem and create a culture of responsible drinking.